alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
MEMOARANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: SFIS/DLMS Meeting of February 1, 2010

1. Participants.

a. Bob Hammond ,DLMSO

b. Larry Tanner, DLMSO

c. Dale Yeakel ,DLMSO (partial)

d. Ellen Hilert, DLMSO (partial)

e. Scott Hiland, OSD BTA

f. Daniel Alcide, OSD BTA

g. John Gabarino, OSD BTA

h. Tom Rybak, OSD BTA

i. Joe Doyle, OSD Comptroller (partial)

2. Open Issues/Actions for PDC Completion.

a. Statement required in PDC regarding relationship of Supply/Finance SFIS PDC to 

Financial Data in Procurement initiative. BTA says none. Action BTA.

b. Determination required regarding proposed ANSI X12 qualifiers for SFIS data elements. 

These qualifiers are controlled by the Financial Management Regulation. Action Joe 

Doyle, OSD Comptroller.

c. Determination regarding use of fund codes with “*”, which indicates that the 

appropriation chargeable is the FY of the bill from the supplier. Action Joe Doyle, OSD 

Comptroller.

d. Proposed addition of SFIS data element “Budget Line Item” to DLMS transactions needs 

to be evaluated in terms of need for transacting this data element. Action BTA.

e. BTA desires to include a statement in the PDC that SFIS data elements can be derived 

within Component ERPs based on user role and project. Action BTA.

3. DLMSO discussion comments regarding some implementation challenges.

a. Not all Components, such as Defense Agencies, have planned ERPs.

b. Internet ordering applications, such as eMALL, GSA advantage and GSA Global will not 

have Component user roles and project information to generate SFIS data elements.

c. Offline orders, such as emergency requisitions to call in centers, will not likely have SFIS 

data elements.

d. In the interim environment, ERPs will have to provide both the SFIS data elements and 

the fund code in DLMS transactions, so that the ERPs will need the fund code data and 

will need to match it with the SFIS data. PDC suggests an alternative that some of the 

SFIS data elements directly related to fund code might be able to be tied directly to the 

fund code table at DAASC in lieu of transacting this data. OSD does not support this 

alternative.

Prepared by: Bob Hammond, DLMSO, 702-767-2117, Robert.hammond@dla.mil
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 3 (Tuesday, January 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-182]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,885]


R.G. Thomas Corporation, Palisades Park, New Jersey; Dismissal of 
Application for Reconsideration

    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(C) an application for administrative 
reconsideration was filed with the Acting Director of the Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at R.G. Thomas Corporation, 
Palisades Park, New Jersey. The review indicated that the application 
contained no new substantial information which would bear importantly 
on the Department's determination. Therefore, dismissal of the 
application was issued.

TA-W-33,885; R.G. Corporation, Palisades Park, New Jersey (December 22, 
1997)

    Signed at Washington, DC this 22nd day of December, 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 98-182 Filed 1-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
#### *State, Respondent, v. Sharrieff, Petitioner,*

No. 92158-0.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 45876-4-II, July 28, 2015, 189 Wn. App. 1012. *Denied*February 10, 2016.
Exhibit 10.2e

 

CONFIDENTIAL

 

2013 EXECUTIVE INCENTIVE PROGRAM

 

MARCH 20, 2013

 

The 2013 Executive Incentive Program is organized around two objective components.  The objective components are: Profitability (70%) and Franchise Value (30%).

 

Participants

 

Participants in the program will be Mehos, Greenwade, Durie and Perschbacher with target awards as established by the Compensation Committee.  Additional participants will be Market Managers (Bell, Irick, Bearden, Edwards and Rivera) with target awards as established by executive management.

 

Stretch Objectives

 

To achieve the full component award, objectives will need to be exceeded.  The following basic methodology will be applied to each objective:

 

A performance threshold, budgeted objective and stretch objective will be established for each measurable target. 30% of the component award will be earned when the performance threshold is met.  80% of the component award will be earned when budgeted objective is achieved.  Up to 120% of the component award will be earned when the stretch objective is achieved.  Results between the performance threshold (30%) and the budgeted objective (80%) will be interpolated on a linear basis and assigned a payout level in 10% increments.  The stretch objective will be extrapolated beyond the budget based on the same linear progression and assigned a payout level in 10% increments up to a maximum of 120%.

 

Profitability Component

 

The profitability component is proposed to comprise 70% of the target award.  The following measures and weightings for each measure are proposed:

 

75% - Bank $ Net Income (after adjusting for 2013 acquisition activity and securities gains taken outside the ordinary course of business, if any)

15% - Bank Non-Interest Expense to Average Assets (%)

10% - Bank Total $ Non-Interest Income

 











 

Franchise Value Component

 

The franchise value component is proposed to comprise 30% of the target award.  The following measures and weightings for each measure are proposed:

 

25% - Weighted Deposit Growth to plan

25% - Loan Growth to plan

25% - Core deposits(1) to total deposits

25% - Classified Assets/Total Loans + ORE

 

A sample Executive Program Scorecard is attached which defines specific performance thresholds at each payout level.

 




(1) Core deposits will exclude financial institution, bankruptcy (i.e., Trustee Solutions), municipal utility district, public and brokered deposits.
```

[Federal Register: March 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 57)]
[Notices]               
[Page 14479]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25mr10-104]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6929]

 
Waiver of Restriction on Assistance to the Central Government of 
Algeria

    Pursuant to section 7086(c)(2) of the Department of State, Foreign 
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division F, 
Pub. L. 111-117) (``the Act''), and Department of State Delegation of 
Authority Number 245-1, I hereby determine that it is important to the 
national interest of the United States to waive the requirements of 
section 7086(c)(1) of the Act with respect to the Government of 
Algeria, and I hereby waive such restriction.
    This determination shall be reported to the Congress, and published 
in the Federal Register.

    Dated: March 10, 2010.
Jacob J. Lew,
Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.
[FR Doc. 2010-6641 Filed 3-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-31-P
```
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.2

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Christopher Westad, the President, Chief Financial Officer and Director of
Able Energy, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)    the Annual Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the Quarter ended
September 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); and

(2)    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated: November 13, 2002




/s/Christopher Westad
---------------------
Name: Christopher Westad
Title: President, Chief Financial Officer and Director
# C_2014431EN.01001603.xml

| 1.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/16

---

Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-130/14) (1)

1

(2014/C 431/25)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.01

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

and Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b)

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Concur Technologies, Inc. (Concur) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, S.
Steven Singh, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the Board of Concur, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b), that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Concur.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 8, 2007



By

/s/ S. Steven SinghS. Steven SinghChief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board


This certification accompanies this report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
and shall not be deemed to be filed by Concur for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This certification is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Concur under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Exhibit
32.2




CERTIFICATION




The
undersigned officer of Albany Molecular Research, Inc. (the “Company”)
hereby certifies to his knowledge that the Company’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This
certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and
Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”) promulgated
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the
Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this
certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of
that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference
into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the
extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.




Date:
      May 7, 2010
              /s/ Mark T. FrostName:
      Mark T. FrostTitle:
      Senior Vice President, Administration, Chief Financial Officer and
      Treasurer
AIR RESOURCES BOARD

VENTURA COUNTY APCD RULE EVALUATION FORM - Page 1

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

District: Ventura County APCD Rule No.: 26.13 Date Adopted: November 10, 2015

Rule Title: New Source Review – Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

Date Submitted to ARB: November 30, 2015 If an Amended Rule, Date Last Amended: Adopted June 28, 2011

Is the Rule Intended to be Sent to the U.S. EPA as a SIP Revision? (X) Yes ( ) No If NO, do not complete remainder of form.

District Contact: Tyler Harris Phone No.: 805/645-1407

Narrative Summary of New Rule or Rule Changes: ( X) Amended Rule : Amendments to Rule 26.13 will address deficiencies identified 

by U.S. EPA so they will delegate federal PSD permitting authority to Ventura County APCD.

Pollutant(s) Regulated by the Rule (Circle): ROG NOx SO2 PM10 CO TAC Lead

II. EFFECT ON EMISSIONS

Complete this section ONLY for rules that, when implemented, will result in quantifiable changes in emission. Attach reference(s) for emission factor(s) and other 

information. Attach calculation sheet showing how the emissions information provided below was determined. See staff report Appendix A for emission calculations.

Net Effect on Emissions: ( ) Increase( ) Decrease ( X ) N/A No impact on emissions. 

II. EFFECT ON EMISSIONS

Emission Reduction Commitment in SIP (Control Measure) for this source category: N/A 

Inventory Year Used to Calculate Changes in Emissions: N/A Area Affected: County

Future Year Control Profile Estimate:

Year

Tons/year 

Reductions 

2012 Baseline 

Tons/year 

Subject to Rule

Control 

Level

Percent 

Control

Control 

Level

Control Factor
AIR RESOURCES BOARD

VENTURA COUNTY APCD RULE EVALUATION FORM - Page 2

III. SOURCES/ATTAINMENT STATUS

District is: ( X ) Attainment (Rule applies only to attainment criteria pollutants) ( ) Nonattainment ( ) Split

Approximate Total Number of Small (<100 TPY) Sources Controlled by Rule: None

Percent in Nonattainment Area: Not Applicable

Number of Large (>100 TPY) Sources Controlled: Five existing major sources Percent in Nonattainment Area: Not Applicable

IV. EMISSION REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY

Do the Rules Include Emission Limits that are Continuous? N/A

V. OTHER REQUIREMENTS

Rule 26.13 – New Source Review – Prevention of Significant Deterioration

Applicability Section B

Incorporation by Reference Section C

Requirements Section D

Public Participation Section E

VI. IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY PLAN

(X) No Impact( ) Impacts RFP ( ) Impacts attainment

Discussion: Amended Rule 26.13 applies only to new major sources or modifications of existing major sources of attainment 

criteria pollutants. Therefore, amendments to Rule 26.13 will not affect RFP.
# B11 Instructions

&"Times New Roman,Bold"&12SPE4A6-15-R-0340		&"Times New Roman,Bold"&12Schedule B11
No. 10-547.

#### In re Martin Bettwieser, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 1133, 131 S. Ct. 920,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 92.

178 L. Ed. 2d 808,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.
# C_2016038EN.01001501.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/15

---

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 October 2015 — Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. v European Commission, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie

(Case C-519/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Agriculture - Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 - Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications - Registration of the designation ‘Gouda Holland’ - Producers using the name ‘Gouda’ - Absence of a legal interest in bringing proceedings))

(2016/C 038/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. (represented by: M. Loschelder and V. Schoene, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Schima, J. Guillem Carrau and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman and B. Koopman, acting as Agents), Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie (represented by: P. van Ginneken and G. Béquet, advocaten)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. shall pay the costs.

| 3. | The Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie shall bear their own respective costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie shall bear their own respective costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 16, 19.1.2015.

1

---
**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP3.9. APPENDIX 3.9INVENTORY ADJUSTMENT – DUAL (OWNERSHIP TRANSFER)**

## 

2

**AP3.9-**

AP3.9-1

APPENDIX 3.9
No. 10-9603.

#### Kathalina Monacelli, Petitioner v. Florida Department of Children and Families, et al.

565 U.S. 810, 132 S. Ct. 83,

181 L. Ed. 2d 14,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6812.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
No. 10-10686.

#### Robert Charles Towery, Petitioner v. Charles L. Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections.

565 U.S. 844, 132 S. Ct. 159,

181 L. Ed. 2d 74,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6248.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 641 F.3d 300.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of AmerInst Insurance Group, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Murray Nicol, Vice President and chief financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                       
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ MURRAY NICOL                                                       
|Murray Nicol Vice President and chief financial
officer August 12, 2005



20
No. 10-11275.

#### Bobby E. Hazel, Petitioner v. Eric D. Wilson, Warden.

565 U.S. 805, 132 S. Ct. 379,

181 L. Ed. 2d 6,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6580.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petition in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U.S. 1, 113 S. Ct. 397, 121 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1992) (per curiam).
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 
 We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (No. 333-134102) and Form S-8 (No. 333-104060 and No. 333-132898) of
DCAP Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report dated March 17, 2008 with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of DCAP Group, Inc. appearing
in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of DCAP Group, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
 
 
 
 
 
 Holtz
Rubenstein Reminick LLP
 Melville,
New York
 March 31,
2008
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18481]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-322-000]


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes In FERC Gas 
Tariff

July 7, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, Trunkline Gas Company (Trunkline) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet to be effective August 1, 
1998:

Third Revised Sheet No. 242A

    Trunkline states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the Commission's Order No. 587-G, issued April 16, 1998, at Docket No. 
RM96-1-007. The revised tariff sheet included herewith reflects Version 
1.2 standards promulgated by the Gas Industry standards Board which 
were adopted by the Commission and incorporated by reference in the 
Commission's Regulations. Specifically, in addition to upgrading the 
version of previously adopted standards 1.4.6, 2.4.6, 4.3.5, 4.3.16 and 
5.3.30 are incorporated by reference and Standard 4.3.4 has been 
deleted.
    Trunkline states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
affected customers, applicable state regulatory agencies and all 
parties to this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18481 Filed 7-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 10-10607.

#### David Alamo Villegas, et al., Petitioners v. Florencio Berrios Castrodad, et al.

565 U.S. 811, 132 S. Ct. 85,

181 L. Ed. 2d 16,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6910.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioners are allowed until October 24, 2011, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.